Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone
Hidden Tax: US Families Pay an Extra $1,000 per Year to Support Religion
When the Constitution’s framers wrote the Bill of Rights, they had a profound purpose for the first amendment’s prohibition on religion in government. Whether or not the framers knew that in the 21st Century the Religious Right would emerge as a real and present danger to America is unknown, but the threat is real and the government is complicit in aiding Dominionists in their takeover attempts. Republicans have assailed women since the start of the 112th Congress at the behest of religious groups, and in states and at the Federal level homophobes are pursuing legislation to deny gays equal rights guaranteed in the Constitution. Beyond supporting legislation to impose Christianity’s beliefs on the entire country, churches receive unconstitutional non-profit tax-exempt status and the clergy receive special tax cuts and privileges working Americans are forbidden from taking. For churches to keep their tax-exempt status they are forbidden from campaigning from the pulpit; however, a religious group is pushing the IRS to remove the prohibition on actively campaigning for legislation or candidates while still maintaining their non-profit status.
The recent special election to replace Anthony Weiner in New York is a prime example of religious interference in government, and actively campaigning by religious groups to defeat a candidate who voted for same-sex marriage in June. A group of 40 Orthodox rabbis sent a letter saying a vote for David Weprin, the Democratic candidate, was violating Jewish law. The problem is that religious law is not supported by the Constitution; something conservative Christians do not comprehend or they would not pass laws forbidding enforcement of Islam’s Sharia law. Two weeks ago in California, an evangelical preacher told his congregation that “the bible forbids Christians from voting for Socialist liberal-Democratic candidates or their anti-Christian agenda that attacks traditional marriage.” The Baptist preacher continued that “enemies of the gospel are actively persecuting advocates of traditional marriage and that if Democrats won elections, preachers would be imprisoned for upholding god’s view that homosexuality was an abomination.” The Southern Baptist Convention affiliate is exempt from federal, state, and county taxes because they are non-profit even though the pastoral staff tells its members how to vote. It is interesting that the preachers drive luxury cars and have no visible signs of support or income except for the money they fleece from the congregation. Nonprofit indeed.
A group of conservative Christian lawyers in the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) is supporting California’s Prop 8 in federal court and they are pushing to force the IRS to stop the regulation prohibiting religious non-profits from campaigning. The senior legal counsel for ADF, Erik Stanley said that, “Pastors and churches shouldn’t live in fear of being punished or penalized by the government,” and that, “Keeping the gospel central to what is preached is not in conflict with addressing the subject of political candidates when warranted. These results show that the desire to keep the gospel central does not mean that pastors want the IRS to regulate their sermons under the threat of revoking their church’s tax-exempt status.” Stanley is mistaken when he says addressing candidates is central to any particular gospel because there is no reference in the bible to political candidates or telling adherents how to vote. The IRS does not regulate sermons either; but to retain tax-exempt status, preachers cannot advocate for a political agenda or a candidate to their captive, frightened congregation.
In a survey conducted by ADF and Lifeway Research, 86% of pastors said they disagreed that; “The government should regulate sermons by revoking a church’s tax exemption if its pastor approves of or criticizes candidates based on the church’s moral beliefs or theology.” Whether the preachers agree with the IRS or not, one of the conditions of maintaining tax-exempt status is not campaigning from the pulpit or under cover of religious authority. No church should receive special tax exemption, but if they do they are expected to follow the rules. It is another instance of the Religious Right’s attempt at making their own set of rules that the government must follow. Besides imposing their religious beliefs on the entire population, they are leeches on the American taxpayers.
The economic impact on taxpayers is substantial when considering that when churches avoid paying tax, the cost of maintaining roads, police and fire protection, and schools must be made up by everyone else. When the community picks up the tab for a church’s drain on the community, it is a subsidy and in violation of the separation of church and state. It has been estimated that when church and clergy tax-exemptions are taken into account, the average family may pay up to $1,000 in extra taxes every year to make up for the lost revenue because of the church’s tax exemption and it includes sales taxes, inheritance taxes, income taxes, and personal taxes. It is bad enough conservative Christians are supporting Republicans’ agenda, but it is an outrage that the public has to fund their anti-American advocacy. Americans should not be forced to fund conservative’s agendas that will eventually lead to a theocracy, and yet, some of the groups that support maintaining tax-exempt status for churches are stunning.
There are many liberals who support giving special tax breaks to the clergy and tax-exemption for churches and it is the height of hypocrisy. For one thing, the majority of Christian churches support anti-gay, anti-women, and conservative issues like more tax breaks for the wealthy and elimination of the poor and elderly’s safety nets. How can a liberal oppose tax breaks for the wealthy and support tax breaks for the clergy and their churches? It is incredibly disappointing to discover many liberals unknowingly support the issues they claim to oppose and then expect all taxpayers to join them in promoting conservative issues; especially when the result is a theocracy.
Dominionists have stated their intention is to gain control of every aspect of society and government to install a Christian theocracy and they are well on their way to achieving their goal. Now, they are attempting to control the IRS and change the rules that are in place to protect the Constitution’s separation of church and state. The American people cannot continue being forced to pay churches to undermine democracy and promote hate-inspired conservative-Christian ideology. As the Religious Right gains influence and support from well-funded and powerful religious groups, their supremacy over the government will reach a tipping point that will never be overcome. The Alliance Defense Fund is the tip of the iceberg and as more governors, legislators, and presidential candidates in the Republican Party are emboldened by support from the pulpit, democracy faces a challenge an invading army would envy.
The Founding Fathers could not have predicted that their separation of church and state protection in the first amendment would fall with support from within the government, but that is what is happening and it should frighten the life out of every American. The bible says followers of Christ are supposed to acquiesce to the government, but Dominionists are precariously close to becoming the government. Now they are attempting to control the IRS to force Americans to fund their conservative agenda while they get off tax-free. It is insulting, disgusting and patently unfair that Americans are forced to support Dominionists with their hard-earned tax dollars when the money should go to build roads, bridges, schools and hire teachers, police officers, and fire fighters. Unfortunately, with support from Christian-conservative legislators, wealthy religious groups, and hypocritical liberals it will not be long before every tax dollar goes to the wealthy, corporations, and Dominionists so they can eviscerate what is left of American democracy.
For the past two years, there has been a fair amount of talk concerning shared sacrifice. In theory it i ...
One of the benefits of citizenship in America is the protection afforded to every resident based on prin ...
The simple phrase "All men are created equal" has been called an immortal declaration, and perhaps the s ...
"History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. Thi ...
Throughout history, masses of people developed governments and standardized rules to maintain order and ...
john
Sep. 16th, 2011 at 1:38 pm
its worse than that… we subsidize them directly… W’s faith based initiative is a rip off and a travesty..
why are not people enraged?
SinghX
Sep. 16th, 2011 at 2:33 pm
Forget taxing them–arrest them! Why aren’t those 86% of pastors who think the law is fair & just stand up and demand that those who tarnish the privilege concerning “preaching politics” be arrested/assets seized?
Why aren’t they setting the example? Why do they continue to enable these crooks and lairs who hid behind their Cross? Why aren’t we seeing outrage from those who do follow, respect the law in their churches? Where is their courage to openly take a stand and lead the charge?
a
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 7:57 am
yes yes and more yes
Jay
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 9:50 am
Well, I think it’s a little more complicated than that. An actual arrest, while interesting in theory, could have some profoundly negative effects on the way that the first amendment is treated. For instance, if a religious leader preached that that you should give away your possessions to the poor (within the parameters of several religions), could that be considered “preaching communism”, which is also considered a political stance? The answer, is, of course, “no”. But at the same time, drawing those lines becomes very difficult except in the most extreme cases.
What I’m saying is that by no means should we have our priests and pastors and monks and imams tell us how to vote. I absolutely agree that religious leaders should not be practicing politics. But I also think having the government “regulate” sermons is a terrible, terrible idea.
Theoretically, if we taxed these churches, we’d be missing out on thousands of dollars of tax revenue because some people don’t go to church, or don’t go to those churches. Are you ready to consider that “lost revenue”? Of course not.
SinghX
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 11:52 am
There was a bill in 1954, the Johnson Bill, that did attempt at government intervention to “regulate” sermons.
Keep in mind, this was a reaction to McCarthyism…it was rejected by the Supreme Court (??); can’t quite remember the history of how it was defeated as a 1st Amendment issue…you can look it up.
What I’m referring to is making an “example” of the fundamentalist extremist who blatantly flaunt, intentionally violate the constitution/our laws, and, that they should be called out by those who lead congregations that stay within the law. Basically, shut them down via their own “peers”.
As long as the law abiding religious folks are silent, they allow the “bad behavior” charlatans to site all kinds of faux “precedence” that America has no true legacy of secularism. Every time they are embolden to violate the law, it makes it harder and harder to hold the line against the Christian Nationalist agenda, or war on the rest of “us”.
Brad
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 5:57 pm
We have to face the reality that certain religious sects internally and externally have declared war on our country. We have Jihadist Islam trying to destroy us from without, and the Christian, Jewish and Scientologist extremists trying to undermine our nation from within.
The time for appeasement and compromise is over. We are fighting for our very survival.
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 5:59 pm
Hmmmm, seen any car bombs lately?
Please, get off the newt gingrich train
Well I take that back, we do have the christians here trying to destroy us
GinaK
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 8:01 pm
Hasn’t the money that the members donated to the Church already been taxed when the members pay their payroll tax? Why should the Church be taxed on money that has been taxed already?
Why should your income be taxed and then take your measly earnings to the grocery store for groceries,clothing etc and be taxed again?
And whatever happened to Freedom of Speech? The only reason that people want the churches taxed is so that they cannot preach politics.
I see nothing wrong with preaching politics in the church. It certainly couldn’t hurt this country anymore than it has been hurt in the last 50 years by the corrupt Republicans and Democrats.
GOD HELP THIS COUNTRY!!! We sure need it.
coyotenose
Sep. 18th, 2011 at 8:58 am
Because it’s income FOR THE CHURCH. By your logic, no one, anywhere, should be taxed, because the dollars they were paid were already taxed right before they received them.
Your “grocery store” comment is entirely unrelated to the church taxation question.
Churches can preach politics all they want; they just can’t do it and at the same time evade responsibility for contributions to society. Please read the article again.
JayWilmont
Sep. 18th, 2011 at 1:25 pm
Nobody is forcing churches to give up anything. They can pay taxes and say whatever they want, endorse whomever they want.
OR
They can be non-profits, play by the extra rules that come with that (not endorsing candidates for example), and get the benefit of not paying taxes.
Reynardine
Sep. 16th, 2011 at 3:27 pm
In the Middle Ages and for the most part through the Renaissance, serfs, socmen, and nominally free peasants were driven below subsistence level supporting both secular and religious fiefdoms; the higher one stood, the less one paid, while the highest were tax-free. The only poor who lived well at all were criminals, and despite hideous public penalties, many were drawn into crime expressly because of this. In turn, this enabled the powerful to say that those who suffered poverty were being punished by “Gahd” for their sinfulness. Look familiar# watch out, folks: the ship has been turned around, and we’re being headed back to the same dismal port we thought we’d left behind.
rednail64
Sep. 16th, 2011 at 3:38 pm
In other news, fait-based services and outreach activities provided by churches, mosques and synagogues save the taxpayer and government millions of dollars each year.
coyotenose
Sep. 18th, 2011 at 9:00 am
And cost us an estimated 130 BILLION each year.
Mark
Sep. 16th, 2011 at 4:33 pm
I’ve always supported the idea churches should be taxed, the LDS church in Utah is in the business of land development, City Creek Mall was created with church funds of more than 2 billion dollars. Obviously the money came from tithe payers, tax free.
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 16th, 2011 at 4:55 pm
we send money to liberty University. I think that is a travesty. Where is the tea party? Taxed enough already? Or will the Domionists like Michelle Bachmann, Ron Paul, and Rick Perry tell them to sit down and be quiet?
We had a lot of people arguing against taxing the churches and that is fine, I want to see if those same people are in here arguing to stop the money that comes out of their pockets to go to churches, especially right wing conservative churches and organizations like liberty University
Dan
Sep. 16th, 2011 at 10:04 pm
Instead of worrying whether or not churches should be taxed, you should instead be pushing to get rid of the unconstitutional IRS and income tax.
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 16th, 2011 at 10:15 pm
Churches being taxes is not the issue. You whine about the IRS yet fully support the US giving our tax money to religion. Hard to take you serious.
the Sixteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution allows the Congress to levy an income tax without apportioning it among the states or basing it on Census results. This amendment exempted income taxes from the constitutional requirements regarding direct taxes, after income taxes on rents, dividends, and interest were ruled to be direct taxes in Pollock v. Farmers’ Loan & Trust Co. (1895). It was ratified on February 3, 1913.
See you.
Smith
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 11:13 am
What you idiots are not realising is that eventually the minorities – Muslims, Hindus, Bhuddhist et al., take over this country and its government, you guys will be forced to pay taxes to support their religion. You are opening a flood gates without any mechanism to control in the future. Your short sighted and stupid thoughts will come back and eventually destroy this country. Where will your grand children go?
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 12:00 pm
You didnt read the article did you
But what you are saying is we have to let the fundie xtians take over to prevent the muslims(around less than 1% of the religious here) the Hindus and Buddhists(Less that 1%)? Seriously, you dont believe that do you? Having xtian fundies in charge is no different than having Sharia law in charge
Sarah Jones
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 12:14 pm
I’m sure you can make your point without insulting people and resorting to school yard level name-calling, the true signature of the vocabulary-impaired.
harry
Sep. 16th, 2011 at 10:27 pm
As a republican, I only come to this site when it shows up on Digg, so, with that disclaimer out there, as an agnostic-theist, I love this article. I am tired of seeing the rich preacher man on tv, driving his Cadillac or Lexus, while his parishioners jam into the church after driving in their little beaters. There are too many BIG churches. I think that yes, religion is needed (some people have to have “something” to believe in because you can’t believe in our government), but once it gets too big, it should be treated as a CORPORATION. A small country or inner city church with a few hundred attendees is different that TD Jakes or Billy Graham and their mega-churches.
My solution (but no one listens to me) is that any church that recieves donations of over $500,000 per year, or if a preacher/church leader recieves a salary greater than 4x the poverty level (I picked that number cause that will let them earn up to $100,000 or so) they (church and preacher) lose their “tax exempt status” and pay taxes like the rest of us.
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 16th, 2011 at 11:04 pm
I could agree with that.
Most big church ministers are millionaires
Reynardine
Sep. 16th, 2011 at 11:42 pm
Sounds about right to me.
koolwoman
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 1:27 am
Hey, Harry. That is the wisest thing I have ever heard from a republican, and I agree with you wholeheartedly.
AlexMMR
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 1:33 am
OMG, I actually agree with someone who has declared themselves a republican. I was going to say that churches should be treated as a business. They have employees, they have customers, why not?
James
Sep. 16th, 2011 at 11:39 pm
Is it wrong when Democrats campaign in churches too?
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 16th, 2011 at 11:49 pm
Do you support paying up to 1000 extra in taxes so our government can give places like Liberty university large amounts of money?
Your question is in the wrong thread but I can tell you the issue is religion in politics no matter which party
koolwoman
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 1:29 am
Yes, James, it is equally wrong if Democrats campaign in churchs
Shandooga
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 12:08 am
It’s not a “tax” unless it goes to the government and it’s not “hidden” unless you didn’t realize you were parting with the money. Way to be biased.
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 12:12 am
It goes to the government and is distributed to the religious organizations the same way any other funds are distributed. Any 5 year old could have figured that out.
Its hidden because you are not told where its going.
Ann Roth
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 1:06 am
Too bad you’re not concerned about Islam who has stated their intention to gain control of every aspect of our society and government to install Sharia law.
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 9:10 am
While that’s hilarious, Sharia law is not here and the 5 million or so muslims who are here are not pushing it. In fact bringing it up has nothing to do with this article. Give up on the silly talking points because it only makes you look foolish.
matt
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 3:13 am
Dude, you have no idea what you’re talking about. Do you realize that taxing churches would be a gross violation of separation of church and state? Separation goes both ways. If you want to treat clergy like everyone else you’re going to need to let them openly support politicians and even run for office themselves. The policy you’re advocating would actually make what you’re complaining about significantly worse.
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 9:16 am
Taxing the churches has nothing to do with separation of church and state. Read up on what separation of church and state means
SinghX
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 11:55 am
Read up…taxthechurches.org/
Freeman
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 9:38 am
I’m all for taxing churches like businesses are taxed. The truly charitable organizations won’t have anything to tax (as it should be, since their charity offsets the need for tax-based services) and the mega-churches will pay their fair share of the tax burden for the public services they consume.
As to Matt’s concern, clergy already openly support politicians and run for office. The entire Baptist / Evangelical community are for all practical purposes already firm in their political preferences. Political sermons serve to reinforce the amen echo chamber rather than persuade the unconvinced. There doesn’t seem to be much room left for things to get “significantly worse”. I left the Baptist church over 30 years ago because they were way too political for my taste then. Little has changed except that they are more open about it now.
And you’re going to have to show me how taxing churches would be a “gross violation of separation of church and state” any more than subsidizing churches with tax exemption is today. Singling out one religion for special treatment would be a violation.
Brenda
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 1:16 pm
I realize I’m off on a tangent a little here, but I’m glad Freeman said, “truly charitable organizations” — there are so few of those, at least in broad scale. It appears to me that mega-churches operate in much the same way:
The American Red Cross President and CEO Marsha J. Evans
salary for the year 2009 was $651,957 plus expenses
The United Way President Brian Gallagher receives $375,000 base salary
along with numerous expense benefits
UNICEF CEO Caryl M. Stern receives $1,200,000 per year (100k per month)
plus all expenses including a ROLLS ROYCE Less than 5 cents of your
donated dollar goes to the cause
The Salvation Army’s Commissioner Todd Bassett receives a salary of
only $13,000 per year(plus housing) for managing this $2 billion dollar
organization.
96 percent of donated dollars go to the cause.
The American Legion National Commander receives a $0.00 zero salary.
Your donations go to help Veterans and their families and youth!
NC
Sep. 18th, 2011 at 4:46 am
I was shocked to read some of those figures. My shock only lasted long enough to find that most of the figures you list are bull:
www.snopes.com/politics/b...
Snopes is a great tool.
NC
Sep. 18th, 2011 at 4:50 am
I wonder if those “facts” were created by the Salvation Army, whose efficiency rating (at 82%) lags behind all those listed as worst offenders (running from 92%-85% efficiency).
Cleveland
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 10:53 am
The tax exempt status for churches was justified by their doing “good works” like feeding/clothing/helping the poor..lobbying against womens reproductive health and gay marriage isn’t ‘good works’. Supporting corporate bought candidates and the missions of anti-worker, anti-middle-class PACS isn’t ‘good works’. Most churches and especially the mega-churches have long since abandoned all good works. Tax them.
maruawe
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 12:05 pm
All religious groups and churches should have to pay tax . This exemption is baloney. the division of church and government is baloney . lobbyist for churches and religious groups are pushing the legislative branches of government just like most other groups and it’s disgusting to hear their crying all the time.
Robert
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 1:02 pm
We get it, we get it. You REALLY dislike tax-exempt religious organizations offering opinions on government policies. That said, your view overlooks the much bigger issue.
Meaning it appears it is only certain religious public-policy opinions you don’t like. Presumably others should be applauded. Or – to cite just two that pop to mind – you seem to have forgotten opposition to (government-approved) segregation in the South was driven initially by (usually black) churches and preached from the pulpits, and that the Catholic Church is 100% opposed to (government-approved) capital punishment and to (government-approved) abuse of illegal immigrants.
Unfortunately, we don’t get happily to pick and choose. Tax-exemption for religious organizations is NOT essentially about the Establishment or Free Exercise clauses of the 1st Amendment anyway. It is about wider charitable status: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cha...
Or, put another way, because you and others don’t like some religious leaders’ political opinions, we should risk tax-exempt charitable status being questioned also for the likes of the ACLU, Habitat for Humanity, International Planned Parenthood, and the Cousteau Society? Use your head. Some preachers you obviously can’t stand would LOVE you shortsightedly to start to push matters in that policy direction.
scott
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 5:01 pm
Wow…. nice and to the point.
At least the people on the left can take comfort in the fact that they are way smarter than idiots on the right like you:)
Shallow populast commments always amuse me…
James
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 1:10 pm
Let churches demonstrate their service to communities in need: AIDs patients, Systematically Poor, Homeless, Illegal Immigrants under persecution, Gays and Lesbians under persecution, the injured Veterans of our wars and all of the meek, poor, needy, helpless that the beatitudes bless. When they have proven that they provide more to the people in this country than they take from us in tax breaks and tithes, we can say that God’s work is being done. Otherwise, modern church behavior simply proves again that Organized Religion is a man-made construct invented to serve some men in their domination of other, weaker people.
j
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 4:33 pm
We should sterilize all religious people and finally put an end to the bulls*it.
pete in australia
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 6:15 pm
your country is so polarised. both in this opinion piece and the subsequent comments.
and while it does not matter to me personally if your country spirals into anarchy, the problem is when you do, you will take the rest of the world with you, when the inevitable happens.
america, realise this, you guys need to pay taxes if you want your government to pay back its debts! never mind pay for services for your citizenry.
Sarah Jones
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 6:18 pm
Hey Pete, I hear you. Sadly, your import of Mr Murdoch is what really gave this anarchy no taxes radical movement their wings. All we can do is push back on the lies but the KoolAid is strong. Have they started investigations into Murdoch there? They called for them a while ago. Just wondering where that stands. Maybe you can get him to come back for a trial and just sort of keep him there:-) America would be a lot better for it.
Richard Williams
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 7:00 pm
So much misinformation here, hard to know where to begin. Funny how people will interpret things… the exemption from taxation by the US Government is exactly to support freedom of religion. If the US Government could tax churches, they would have to report things that are none of the government’s business and yield some of the contributions to the church’s work of peace and justice (theoretically) to support government prerogatives – like war. Further taxes are generally used to influence us (to buy houses, invest, etc) and this could not be allowed by the first amendment. I, as a church-going person, would rather not share my contributions to Christ’s work of overcoming the oppression of Empires to the very Empire it is trying to overcome. The different taxation method for pastors is an old tradition going back to the Anglican establishment church system and Catholic priory system before that. Pastors were felt to be in the employ of the community and God and taxation should be a light burden, again to avoid the government from using taxation to unduly influence pastors or churches. It was also typical that these were sons (and daughters) of well-to-do people who gave up their riches to serve God. As far as churches being apolitical, Christianity will have some difficult times with that. After all their hero, Jesus (or Joshua) of Nazareth was such a rabble-rouser against the Romans and so successful at political organizing that the Romans chose to execute him. Lastly, churches represented the backbone of the Civil Rights movement. It is therefore understandable why some might wish to silence the church as a political force. Of course, some churches are good and some are bad and will use their privilege for good and for bad.
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 7:10 pm
Freedom from taxation is an agreement to not preach politics from the pulpit period and is not affected by the 1st. However many churches ignore the non taxing agreement
Christs work is overcoming oppressive empires?(Bush) Trying to overcome the empire of the country they reside in?(Bryan Fischer) And it was the Jews who asked for him to be executed.
Wait, is this satire?
God_is_with_us
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 8:57 pm
People keep saying that separation of church and state doesn’t apply when it comes to taxing churches. Have you forgotten history? No Taxation without Representation!!! If you tax the church then the church will have representation in politics.
I’m not sure what church you currently go to or have been to in the past or if you even believe in God. But a quick reminder is that the bible does an excellent job of outlining how we should live our lives. It’s your “free will” to choose to follow the bible or not. With that being said how do you separate when the guidelines for living that the bible outlines contradict the current policies being voted on? When preachers give a sermon that homosexuality is a sin and if the person in the church is a Christian, have to believe what God says in the bible. Why would they vote for same sex marriage? Why would they go against their faith?
Since when does the bible say that Christ’s work is about overcoming oppressive empires? I assume you are talking about the exodus from Egypt. That was only because the pharaoh was not allowing the Jews to go to their promised land. I like how you point fingers at the Jews and blame them for having Jesus executed. Everybody back then is to blame. Besides if Jesus didn’t hang on the cross there wouldn’t be so many Christians around the world. Stop living in the past.
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 17th, 2011 at 9:04 pm
Not sure what the bible has to do with taxation of churches. The issues is that churches are using their pulpits to preach politics and sway voters. That breaks the agreement of non taxation.
As for oppression, I was responding to someone who said we cant tax churches because they are fighting oppression somewheres
Also, the churches have representation. They get zoning laws where they can build churches, the people all have representation, there is no lack of representation
Zerotarian
Sep. 20th, 2011 at 2:37 pm
Could you please provide a citation for this $1,000 per family figure?